Wiktionary:Votes/2014-08/Templates context and label

• Polling on: Clarifying which template to use to tag definition lines as "countable", "transitive", "colloquial", "geography" and the like. Currently available templates are {{context}}, {{cx}}, {{label}}, {{lb}}. The choice is about template name, not about syntax of its parameters. Two choices are presented: one between (context, cx) and (label, lb), and another one between long form (context, label) and short form (cx, lb).

  The syntaxes might look like this, assuming the language as the first parameter of the template:

  • {{context|es|colloquial}}
  • {{cx|es|colloquial}}
  • {{label|es|colloquial}}
  • {{lb|es|colloquial}}

• Poll starts: 00:01, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
• Poll ends: 23:59, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Poll extended to 23:59, 30 October 2014 (UTC) --Dan Polansky (talk) 17:14, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Poll extended to 23:59, 30 November 2014 (UTC) --Dan Polansky (talk) 07:47, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Poll extended to 23:59, 30 December 2014. (UTC) --Dan Polansky (talk) 22:51, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Poll extended to 23:59, 30 January 2015 (UTC) --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:25, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Poll extended to 23:59, 28 February 2015 (UTC) --Dan Polansky (talk) 18:13, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
• Poll created: Dan Polansky (talk) 17:42, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
• Discussion:

  Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2014/August#Migrating_from_Template:context_to_Template:cx

  Wiktionary talk:Votes/2014-08/Templates context and label

1. Support Because {{label}} takes the language as the first parameter, whereas {{context}} requires lang=. —CodeCat 19:25, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

   The vote text makes it clear this is about the template name, not about the parameter order and syntax. We can make {{context}} behave exactly like {{label}}, yielding syntax like {{context|es|colloquial}}. --Dan Polansky (talk) 17:28, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

2. Support More accurate when dealing with grammatical categories like "transitive" or "passive", or "with accusative", and still fits the idea of a context semantically. ObsequiousNewt (ἔβαζα|ἐτλέλεσα) 00:20, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
3. Support embryomystic (talk) 23:37, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
4. Support per Newt. Vorziblix (talk) 01:32, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
   • Support per Newt. I know this poll ended a few months ago but if I'd seen this page before I would've supported this option. --Daniel 07:56, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

1. Support We want to make it clear that you aren't supposed to write definitions like "(tree) oak", and context does a better job at that. -- Liliana • 10:57, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

   That could be addressed by template documentation. And how often has this been a problem in practice? — Keφr 15:28, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

2. Support I prefer to make clear that register and other context information is the primary purpose of information so position on a definition line. DCDuring TALK 16:51, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
3. Support, and in addition, I'd like to note that I prefer slang and certain other things being decoupled from context. Purplebackpack89 14:16, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

   Nonsensical. Of all things, "slang" is definitely a context label. — Keφr 15:28, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

   @Kephir:: And? The main jist of my comment is I believe context covers too many things that would be better covered in other templates Purplebackpack89 22:55, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

1. Support Dan Polansky (talk) 09:50, 30 August 2014 (UTC) I dislike the introduction of {{context}}, but if we need to have a template before "colloquial" and the like, let it be short. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:50, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

   Oppose —CodeCat 19:27, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

2. Support I don't care whether the short name is botically changed afterward to a longer, more communicative name: I just like to save keystrokes. DCDuring TALK 16:47, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
3. Support Ivan Štambuk (talk) 21:49, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

   Abstain Too amorphous, depends on what the short and long template names are Purplebackpack89 14:17, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

4. Support, but also in agreement with This below. ObsequiousNewt (ἔβαζα|ἐτλέλεσα) 00:20, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

   Oppose --Neskaya _sprecan? 16:50, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

   This poll was designed to be free from opposes in these "I prefer" sections; each preference has a heading under which a support can be filed, and a complementary heading. I won't be removing these "opposes", but they make the poll results a bit more confusing. --Dan Polansky (talk) 13:38, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

   I've indented non-supports to ease counting of supports. --Dan Polansky (talk) 13:54, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

5. Support Vorziblix (talk) 01:32, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

• Support --Daniel Carrero (talk) 18:29, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

1. Support again, for clarity purposes. -- Liliana • 10:57, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

   Oppose —CodeCat 19:27, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

   I've indented non-supports to ease counting of supports. --Dan Polansky (talk) 13:54, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

2. Support because clarity and readability, also accessibility to new users on the project. --Neskaya _sprecan? 16:49, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
   • Support per Neskaya. I know this poll ended a few months ago but if I'd seen this page before I would've supported this option. --Daniel 07:56, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
     • Striking. I voted like this months before I got used to the short template names, which I now think is better. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 18:16, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

1. Why can't we have them all, as redirects to the one central template? Or is this vote to choose a "canonical" name for the template? This, that and the other (talk) 07:39, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

   This is a poll about which template editors prefer. This poll does not propose any deletion of a template. A participant in the poll may clarify in their comment that they oppose deletion of any template. Right now, at least one editor is performing a particular conversion in the mainspace, and we do not know whether that conversion matches editor preferences. --Dan Polansky (talk) 15:55, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

2. Moo. — Keφr 14:05, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

1. Abstain. Whateva. Renard Migrant (talk) 16:55, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

This was a difficult vote to close, and if anyone disagrees with anything I have written below, I am open to being corrected.

• The choice between the template names "context" and "label" did not reach a consensus: 4 users (57%) prefer "context" while 3 (43%) prefer "label".
• The choice between long and short template names came out as follows:
  • 5 users preferred the short template name. One of the users who opposed the short template name supported the long template name.
  • 2 users preferred the long template name.
  • 1 user opposed both choices, and 2 others "opposed the poll".
• On the basis of the numbers, it appears there is support for the short template name (5-2; 72% support). However, I don't think this vote was very well structured, and I would recommend a second vote be held with a more explicit statement and clearer options. For example, it is not apparent, from the statement at the top of the vote, what exactly is meant by "clarifying which template to use"; it would have been clearer to state exactly what will happen to the template that is not preferred.

This, that and the other (talk) 02:27, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

This is a poll ("Polling on", "Poll starts", "Poll ends"), so it cannot be really "closed" in a way leading to immediate action or decision. It was intended to form a basis for a follow-up vote. However, too few people posted their preferences for us to have a truly representative sample. Judging from the limited sample that this poll provided, one could try to create a vote that proposes to give editors a go ahead to use automatic and semiautomatic means to replace all occurrences of {{context}} with {{lb}}. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:35, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

If this is a poll intended to form a basis for a follow-up vote, I guess there's no harm in adding my opinion here even though it ended. --Daniel 07:56, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Indeed; thank you for your late additions. --Dan Polansky (talk) 17:51, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Removing template to archive. - TheDaveRoss 18:46, 13 October 2017 (UTC)